Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 34

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431223633
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Wappapello, MO, USA
Phone
5732229687
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$112,262
Expenses
$120,296
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JAMES EVERETT (JR VICE COMMANDER)
  • MARY BADER (QUARTERMASTER)
  • TED BURNETT (CHAPLAIN)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide social and recreational activities by providing a place for members to get together to socialize and assist disabled and needy veterans.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 81% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 100% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0.4%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0.2%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -31.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0.4% of revenue deployed · 0.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 153 of 153 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.